Thank you!
On 4 July 2012 17:37, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.com wrote:
What exactly is it that is too slow?
I was comparing Queries with debugQuery enabled and disabled. The
difference was 60 seconds to 30 seconds for some (unusual) large
Queries (many Terms over a large set of
Hi,
is there an easy way to get the matches of an OR query?
If I'm searching for android OR google OR apple OR iphone OR -ipod,
I'd like to know which of these terms document X contains.
I've been using debugQuery and tried to extract the info from the
explain information, unfortunately this is
Hi!
On 4 July 2012 17:01, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.com wrote:
First, OR -ipod needs to be written as OR (*:* -ipod) due to an ongoing
deficiency in Lucene query parsing, but I wonder what you really think you
are OR'ing in that clause - all documents that don't contain ipod? That
Hi!
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 23:54, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Michael Jakl jakl.mich...@gmail.com wrote:
The topic field holds roughly 5
values per doc, but I wasn't able to compute the correct number right
now.
How many unique values
Hi!
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 22:21, Emmanuel Espina espinaemman...@gmail.com wrote:
No. But probably we can find another way to do what you want. Please
describe the problem and include some numbers to give us an idea of
the sizes that you are handling. Number of documents, size of the
index,
Our Solr started to throw the following exception when requesting the
facets of a multivalued field holding a lot of terms.
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Too many values for
UnInvertedField faceting on field topic
at
Hi!
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 07:27, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there anyway with MLT to say get similar based on all fields or is
it always a requirement to specify the fields?
It seems to be not the case. But you could append the fields Parameter
in the solrconfig.xml:
lst
Hi, I've been wondering why some of my queries did not return the
results I expected. A debugQuery resulted in the following:
str name=querystring
java^0.0 OR haskell^0.0 OR python^0.0 OR (ruby^0.0) AND
((programming^0.0)) OR programming language^0.0 OR code
coding^0.0 OR -mobile^0.0 OR
Hi!
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 18:42, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Count your parentheses (anyone here speak Lisp?) I think that +
is outside the entire clause, meaning it's saying that there is
a single mandatory clause, and it's the whole thing
You're right in that case
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 22:05, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Right. Essentially, the precedence is given to AND, so this is parsed
as though it were python OR (ruby AND programming) OR programming language
That's exactly what I'd expect, but the problem is that ruby is
marked as
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 06:27, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, at root the Lucene query parser makes no claim of
enforcing boolean logic. Think in terms of MUST, SHOULD
and NOT instead.
Here's a good writeup...
Hi!
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 13:57, Martijn v Groningen
martijn.v.gronin...@gmail.com wrote:
As as I know currently there isn't another way. Unfortunately the
performance degrades badly when having a lot of unique groups.
I think an issue should be opened to investigate how we can improve
Hi, I'm using the grouping feature of Solr to return a list of unique
documents together with a count of the duplicates.
Essentially I use Solr's signature algorithm to create the signature
field and use grouping on it.
To provide good numbers for paging through my result list, I'd like to
). Facets came to mind, but as far as I could
see, they don't offer a total number of facets as well.
I'm using Solr 3.5 (upgraded from Solr 3.4 without reindexing).
Thanks,
Michael
On 9 December 2011 12:46, Michael Jakl jakl.mich...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I'm using the grouping feature of Solr
14 matches
Mail list logo
